Those of us who assist job seekers are very good at teaching the job search process and each of its various skills. These skills include networking, writing cover letters and resumes, and preparing for interviews.
Now we have a new and unexpected dilemma. There is a skill we have been missing. But thanks to some new research, now we have it in our sights.
At the end of August, Dr. Heidi Grant Halvorson published a piece online at the Harvard Business Review blog called "The Surprising Secret to Selling Yourself" which opens with this teaser paragraph:
"There is no shortage of advice out there on how to make a good impression — an impression good enough to land you a new job, score a promotion, or bring in that lucrative sales lead. Practice your pitch. Speak confidently, but not too quickly. Make eye contact. And for the love of Pete, don't be modest — highlight your accomplishments. After all, a person's track record of success (or a company's, for that matter) is the single most important factor in determining whether or not they get hired. Or is it?"
Calling upon recent research conducted at Harvard and Stanford, Halvorson says that we have an unconscious bias in favor of potential vs past accomplishments.
It appears, Halvorson surmises, that we find the candidate with potential to be more interesting, though more uncertain.
OK. This may take some time to digest. But the practical question is: How do we teach and prepare job hunters, especially those with considerable past success, to convey their potential?
Halvorson offers this general thought:
"All this suggests that you need a very different approach to selling
yourself than the one you intuitively take, because your intuitions are
probably wrong. People are much more impressed, whether they realize it or
not, by your potential than by your track record. It would be wise to start
focusing your pitch on your future, as an individual or as a company, rather
than on your past — even if that past is very impressive indeed. It's what
you could be that makes people sit up and take notice — learn to use the
power of potential to your advantage."
So, What is that different approach exactly? What does it mean, in practical terms, to sell based on your potential?
We know how to communicate our past accomplishments using PAR stories (Problem, Action, Results). Is there a formula for communicating future potential?
How about CASE?
Challenge - When asked a "What if" or "How would you handle" type of question, you have been given an opportunity to convey potential. Start by reframing the challenge you are hearing in the question.
Analysis - Any challenge situation will call for some analysis of what is actually going on, what the real need is, so offer a tentative assessment.
Strategy - Suggest a plan that would address the need.
Expectations - What would you expect the outcomes to be if the above proved successful?
What do you think? What would you suggest?
To Job Coaches reading this blog post: We have our work cut out for us. Let's get creative and come up with new tools to help our clients.
Posted by Terrence Seamon on Saturday September 15, 2012
Terry: You and Halvorsen are right on. Resumes and people focus on the past--experience and accomplishments while hiring managers are thinking WHAT CAN YOU DO FOR ME NOW? I had a boss @ Bell Labs who said that when he was hiring programmers to put in the automated 411 we now take for granted. It had never been done B4.
ReplyDeleteDonna
Donna, Thanks for weighing in on this. I think this research finding is so shocking and revolutionary that we (job search coaches) have been caught "flat footed" by it. We are totally focused on the past. Except for CASE, we have no way of teaching our clients how to convey their potential.
ReplyDeleteTerry
Terry, sorry I'm only now getting around to reading this. This is some very interesting research and honestly, as I think about it, I believe I've witnessed this in myself.
ReplyDeleteAnd I love the fact that you've propounded a framework for responding to it. Great acronym, easy to remember and of course, right on point!
Thanks, Ed. Glad you like CASE. Like you, I also have experienced this tension between past vs potential. Because we are in a buyer's market right now, and employers are hiring cautiously (if at all), they too may be caught in the polarity of past (seeking evidence of past successes) and future (seeking evidence of potential).
ReplyDeleteTerry, I have read Dr. Halvorson’s article on the HBR blog and kept thinking about it since she really has a point there.
ReplyDeleteMy interpretation of this is that this is clearly not a “one size fits all” issue. When I work with my clients I tailor my program to their level in the organization. I am not doing the same with an analyst as I do with a senior executive. While there are some similarities at the “big picture” level they are significantly different. For example an executive at the leadership level deals with strategy while the manager deals with operations. Similarly the subject of vision is a leadership role while the manager deals more with tasks. The leader makes things happen while the manager is getting things done. The leader is meeting challenges, determines priorities and is more involved with mentoring. The manager is preparing for challenges, is managing resources and is coaching. And I could go on and on.
So now when I superimpose Dr. Halvorson’s tenet that hiring managers are more interested in the future and not the past I can accept that provided that we are referring to leaders and not managers. Clearly, the expectation from a manager is not to predict the future eighteen months out yet, form a CEO that is exactly what I would expect.